Microsoft Azure API Management Reviews

It is easy to use. 

They need to work on the third party integrations. 

I have experience with Microsoft Azure API Management. 

The technical support team is good. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. 

Microsoft is competitively priced. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Azure API Management with our coding.

All we need to do is run our specific code because the dependencies are already there. 

I would like to see more security features become available. For example, the integration on premises could be better. Things could be more user-friendly. Currently, the integration we work with is more complex than it needs to be.

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for the past thirteen months.

I am finding Microsoft Azure API Management stable.

Day by day we are increasing the usage of Microsoft Azure API Management.

My current experience with technical support has been good.

We were using DIS. We needed to install the run times, libraries, and install operating systems. We had to make a lot of initial preparations to get the process ready to operate. Now it is already available and ready to operate with Microsoft Azure API Management.

I would rate the initial setup process a four out of five.  The setup was basic and good.

We do our implementation through one of our partners. The configuration was around fifteen to twenty minutes long.

There is no investment funding or upfront cost needed. 

There are no licensing fees we pay on a monthly basis.

We compared it with DIS because most of the time we were using DIS, for such kind of deployment.

Many people are using the API, and it is a prominent feature currently being used. I would rate Microsoft Azure API Management an eight out of ten.

In general, we use it for the front application, like the mobile banking application or some other service stuff. We found that it's easier to maintain these internet connections and so on, on the cloud.

In general, we started with Microsoft Azure Cloud as we needed a close integration with our internal or Office solution. In case of Microsoft, Azure Active Directory is easily integrated within the Microsoft platform, including Office. In particular, in API Management, used as front-end APIs, it's easy to manage. Now, we are looking ahead to the hosted solution, which is very nice. 

We use Microsoft due to the stability of the company. 

It's efficient enough and it's just enough for our needs to manage rules and so aforth for API management. We use it due to Microsoft's reputation. We need a stable provider. We cannot play with some providers. 

It is easy to set up. 

The solution is scalable. It is stable as a product as well. 

It's okay. It's not as good as Google. For instance, in Apigee, in Google.

One of the most important improvements for us would be if it supported the HTTP/3 version and new protocol over a quick connection. It's a relatively new standard since 2020. 

I've used the solution for about three years. 

It is a stable product. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. The performance is good. 

While it is scalable, there is some costs involved with expanding. 

We have about 100 people using the solution at the company in terms of deployment. In terms of clients using the solution, that's in the millions. 

We have a premium subscription. We have a local company, a local Microsoft office. We do not have a problem with the support from Microsoft.

We used a CA solution before, and CA was sold to Broadcom and everything changed, politics and so and so. We had to disable CA platform due to the provider. We believe the same issues will not happen to Microsoft.

The initial setup is very easy. It's not complex at all. 

There is a special group that is  responsible for the support and implementation of the platform.

I'm aware of Google, or Apigee, and it's quite a robust product. 

We are a customer and end-user.

It is a subscription service. It's definitely not on-premises in our organization. We do have our core system on-premises, of course.

I would recommend the solution. People have to first understand the different types of subscriptions, however. There are four of them, developer, and intermediates, and then premium, and it's costly. That said, it's not that expensive. It's a very technical piece of software. I can say it's stable and it satisfies our needs. It's just a bit complex. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I like API Management's ability to do hybrid cloud stuff.

Some of the DevOps stuff could be easier to work with. The migration paths are a little complicated, and moving code around could be more seamless. There should be less manual migration when several teams work together to publish code to the DevOps. 

For example, if you and I are working on the same application, and there are conflicts, you should be able to resolve those conflicts more easily. It shows you the conflicts, and you have to fix them yourself. Better conflict resolution with software migration is what I recommend.

I've been working with Azure API Management for maybe five years in total.

Azure API Management is relatively stable.

Azure is a pay-as-you-go model. You build out your virtual environment and pay a monthly price depending on CPU cores, storage, etc.

I rate Azure API Management nine out of 10. I prefer Microsoft products to the others out there because Microsoft has always catered to software developers as opposed to Amazon or Google, which do a lot of other things. Microsoft has always had the best development toolsets, and it's better for application developers.

The solution has pretty stable capabilities.

Their construction tool allows users to easily publish information about the API. It's basically just one click.

You can configure the subscription management onsite and link everything.

The developer portal that exposed the API documentation is great. You can just test the APIs in a very easy way. 

The web portal is useful. You can build a pretty comprehensive portal where users can sign in and you can basically leave the API there.

The API management provided offers good integration with different management systems, like OpenID, for example.

The user management is pretty seamless.

Pricing is definitely an aspect that can be improved. They should offer an additional free tier. For example, if there was a tier for new accounts created, it may help their services by getting people onboarded. Once you will give access to someone and they try it they'll see, "Okay, it works and you can pretty quickly add something on top of it". After that, the client will end up staying, and probably paying.

The cost is also complex in terms of calculating how much everything will ultimately be priced at. It's not straightforward as it takes into account multiple factors.

Technical support could be more flexible and try to meet the client's needs a bit more effectively.

The solution needs to provide more use cases so that we can refer them to clients. It will help answer any questions in relation to performance and load management.

I've been using the solution for about a year at this point.

There are some bugs that exist in this construction tool for the developer portal. We are submitting these bugs to Azure, so they already know about it. Overall, it's pretty stable.

In terms of Azure technical support, we've had no issues in regards to response times. They are prompt. However, in some particular cases, they unable to be flexible. For example, with MQTT blockers, while you might want another port, they might tell you to use the hosted solution in order to get them to configure it. We'd just like them to have more flexibility with requests like this.

In terms of corporate security nowadays, it's very important to be flexible. At the end of the day we get stuck in the bureaucracy. If they could practice flexibility, it would be better for their clients, who may not have the wiggle room on their end.  

That said, we're mostly satisfied with their level of service.

The solution has a kind of calculator and it's not always straightforward to figure out the logic in pricing. There are lots of services that are managed in different ways. For a non-technical person, it's a nightmare to figure everything out.

At the end of the day, you have to build approximate pricing for the solution. According to my experiences in multiple projects, you do get preliminary pricing that is close to or the same as the estimate.  

Right now, for a particular client, we're using a managed version of the solution, however, in the future, I foresee us hosting it somewhere in the cloud.

We're using the most up to date version of the solution.

Overall, the solution has a lot of great features. There are a few bugs here and there, however, a the end of the day, there's lots of value provided.

I'd rate the solution at an eight, on a scale from one to ten. It's got a rather high cost and still has some areas that need some improvement. Otherwise, I'd rate it higher.

We are working on almost everything Microsoft Businesses, Dynamics CRM and Dynamics FinOps ERP. We are utilizing Microsoft Azure hosting platform. We are using API service, Azure functions, event grid, API Management, and all types of Azure services on a need basis.

The integration and API Connect are valuable when we need to connect with web services and REST APIs. Microsoft Azure API Management covers all the security guidelines, security standards, compliance, which includes data security at rest and in transit, making it good from a security perspective.

The licensing part of Microsoft is always higher than other platforms, like Amazon services and other cloud services. Microsoft should work on reducing the cost.

I have been working with API Management for almost seven years.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate it eight out of ten for stability.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate it eight or nine out of ten for scalability.

I have heard from others that Microsoft support often takes five to six days or even up to 15 days to resolve issues, so there is room for improvement in response time.

Positive

The initial setup is a plug and play process. It does not require a lot of customization or configuration. We just need to configure and set up these things, making it easy.

They will always need someone from the development team or a vendor to perform the setup. It is not so easy that everyone can do it on their own.

The cost is higher than that of other platforms, even if used on a consumption or need basis.

Amazon services, Oracle, SAP, and Salesforce, are competitors. However, I do not have much experience with the competing part.

Overall, I rate API Management at eight out of ten. 

While I can recommend it, for the past two years, I have also been considering open-source options. It's beneficial to research open-source tools for viable alternatives.

I am an end user of Microsoft Azure API Management. We integrate Azure API Management in our IT infrastructure as we already have an Azure cloud. API is already readily integratable in Azure because Azure is a cloud platform, and API Management comes with it. Our applications are in Azure cloud.

Azure API Management's service monitoring is not as good as an independent product used for service monitoring. There are dedicated products for service monitoring, so we prefer those dedicated products because the inbuilt capabilities are not exhaustive or comprehensive.

The simplicity to learn and apply using API Management is valuable. Another advantage is the ease of integration with Azure.

Expansion to global regions is a point for improvement, as licensing is costly. A new installation in a different region requests a new subscription. For test management, preproduction management, and production, all require separate subscriptions, resulting in higher costs. 

Additionally, only the premium subscription allows for private IPs. Even for lower environments like test environments, a premium subscription is required, which is limiting.

I have been using the solution for close to two years.

I rate the stability eight out of ten.

I rate scalability seven out of ten.

I rate their technical support eight out of ten.

Positive

We previously used Kong. Our organization chose Azure as the cloud platform for its applications, preferring products that come from Microsoft and are already available on Azure, so we switched to Microsoft Azure API Management.

Initial installation would take only a few hours. Setting up the entire environment took about two to three working days.

Initially, it appeared to be a low-cost solution, but the need for separate subscriptions for every environment and sometimes a high-end subscription for lower environments has increased the cost significantly. The solution seemed cheap initially. However, it ended up being more expensive than expected.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure API Management to others. It's cost-effective for medium to small-scale organizations that do not need a global presence. However, larger global organizations might find better alternatives.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We're a bank, so one of our primary use cases for API Management is integrating our API with third parties that provide financial policies. Sometimes they want to use our services, like payment and customer inquiry, so we give them access to the API gateway. 

Azure API Management allows you to control who has access to your API gateways and assign permission levels to third parties if you want integration with third-party solutions. That has a couple of advantages. Those third parties can directly access your API directly, and you can set limits. It can also configure authentication on other API managers.

An API gateway is like a platform, and your API provides access to the resources in your environment, so this gateway is an intermediary between you and third parties. It's also the interface between your internal applications. For example, if you have a mobile app and internet banking, they can all be copied in the same API through that gateway. So, that was basically the use cases we have. So, we have almost all the API's behind the gateway.

I like API Management's sandbox feature. It's an environment where you can test out the API before putting it into production and connecting it to a live environment.

The hybrid part could be improved because API Management is entirely cloud-based, but some of our resources are on-prem, so formatting is an issue. Our goal is dual implementation. 

There's always room for improvement in terms of the user interface. Generally speaking, technology evolves, so any service provider needs to make their product as user-friendly as possible. In the next couple of years, we'll see more non-tech people handling tech solutions. The solution should be more accessible, so people can use it to create things without being very tech-savvy.

We've been using Azure API Management for about three years.

API Management is stable.

API Management is scalable. The licensing is structured so that you save more at a higher scale. The only limit to the scale is how much you're willing to pay. 

We have an enterprise support contract for Microsoft, and we don't have problems with them. 

We used IBM ESB before Azure API Management, and we're using both now. ESB isn't the same as API Management from a technology perspective. They have distinct functions, but they can do similar things. You can view an API on IBM ESB, but you can view and expose API on Azure API Management. They solve similar problems but are not exactly the same.

Deploying API Management is somewhat tricky depending on your level of technical knowledge. The first time we used it in production, we had it for a couple of months. The first month was an evaluation period, so we had it in a test environment to get a feel for how it works and possible complications. However, you could deploy it in a couple of weeks if you wanted. 

You only need about two to manage it, including one admin. It's more like a platform-as-a-service, so we don't need to do the normal maintenance we do on an on-prem platform. 

We deployed API Management in-house.

I can't disclose how much we pay monthly, but the pricing for Azure API Management is available online. It's pay as you go. The subscription packages have room for different scales. It's calculated by the number of apps or computers you use. You do not have to use the enterprise subscription. These subscriptions have different pricing, so you can find one to meet your needs for scalability.

I rate Azure API Management nine out of 10. Your choice of technology is based on your needs, budget, and C suite. Azure API Management is a good product, but there are some other good services, like Azure Connect, Google APG, and a couple of others. It depends on your needs.

Using a cloud solution has advantages because the client can immediately use the product. Another strong reason we use Azure API Management is that we heavily use Microsoft products in our organization, so Azure is a natural choice.